list_people

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does well: it states the tool is instant, makes no Apify call, reads from a local database, and may return empty results requiring population. It could additionally mention whether results are sorted or whether the role filter is case-sensitive, but the key behavioral traits are disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is efficiently structured: purpose first, then key behavioral note, then parameter details. Every sentence adds genuine value, and the parameter documentation is scannable and complete without being bloated.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter list tool with an output schema available, the description covers what is needed to invoke it correctly: required account, optional filters, local vs. remote behavior, and the empty-result fallback. It does not need to describe return values because an output schema exists.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must fully explain the parameters, and it does. It explains account as slug or full URL, role as an optional filter matched against name/headline/job titles with examples, and limit as the max results with a default.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb, resource, and scope: "List stored employees/leadership for a company from the local database." It clearly differentiates this from scraping tools by emphasizing "stored" and "local database," and it names the fallback to scrape_people().

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives explicit when-to-use guidance: use this for instant local results, and if empty, call scrape_people() first to populate the database. It also directs users to list_accounts() for discovering valid account slugs, which is exactly the kind of routing an agent needs.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.